Crippen v. Chappel
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Washington District Court. Action brought by Chappel against Crippen, Lawrence & Go., and others, for the partition of certain real estate. To the answer of defendants, Crippen, Lawrence & Co., the plaintiff demurred on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute any defense to her petition. The demurrer was sustained at the November Term, 1884. This ruling said defendants bring here for review. The opinion states the facts.
1Opinion of the Court
*496The opinion of the court was delivered by
Valentine, J.:
This was an action for the partition of real estate, brought in the district court of Washington county, by Julia A. Chappel against Henry C. Crippen and H. Francis Crippen, partners as Crippen, Lawrence & Co., and others. The petition alleged, among other things, that the plaintiff and the defendants other than Crippen, Lawrence & Co. were joint owners of the property in question, and that Crippen, Lawrence & Co. claimed to have some interest in the premises; and the plaintiff prayed for partition between herself and the defendants other…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Vallé's Heirs v. Fleming's HeirsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1859
- McNew's Executors v. RogersTennessee Supreme Court · 1848
- Levy v. MartinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
- Tyrrell v. WardIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
- Watson v. WilcoxWisconsin Supreme Court · 1876
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by57 opinions
- Emmert v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Union Mortgage, Banking & Trust Co. v. Peters & TrezevantMississippi Supreme Court · 1895
- Hartford Fire Insurance v. Western Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1979
- National Surety Co. v. State Savings BankCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
- Kent v. BaileySupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.